NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Penberthy v Manasseh [2013] NSWSC 317 Hearing dates: 3 April 2013 Decision date: 04 April 2013 Jurisdiction: Equity Division Before: Hallen J Decision: (i) Having found that the Plaintiff is an eligible person, and that the provision made for her in the Will of the deceased is inadequate for her proper maintenance or advancement in life, order that she receive, out of the estate of the deceased, a lump sum of $225,000. (ii) Order that no interest is to be paid on the lump sum, if that lump sum is paid within 28 days of the making of these orders; otherwise, interest calculated at the rate prescribed by s 84A(3) Probate and Administration Act 1898, on unpaid legacies, is to be paid from that date until the date of payment. (iii) Order that the costs of the Plaintiff, calculated on the ordinary basis, and the costs of the Defendant, calculated on the indemnity basis, should be paid out of the estate of the deceased. (iv) Order that the Exhibits should be dealt with in accordance with the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 following the determination of the costs of the proceedings. Catchwords: SUCCESSION - FAMILY PROVISION - The Plaintiff, a daughter of the deceased, applies for a family provision order under Chapter 3 of the Succession Act 2006 - The Defendant is the son of the deceased, to whom Probate of the deceased's Will was granted, and the sole beneficiary named in the Will of the deceased - No dispute that adequate and proper provision was not made in the Will of the deceased for the Plaintiff - Sole issue is the nature and quantum of the provision to be made for the Plaintiff out of the deceased's estate. Legislation Cited: Family Provision Act 1982 Probate and Administration Act 1898 Property (Relationships) Act 1984 Succession Amendment (Family Provision) Act 2008 Succession Act 2006 Cases Cited: Alexander v Jansson [2010] NSWCA 176 Allardice v Allardice, In re Allardice, (1910) 29 NZLR 959 Andrew v Andrew [2012] NSWSCA 308 Bartlett v Coomber [2008] NSWCA 100 Blore v Lang (1960) 104 CLR 124 Bondelmonte v Blackensee [1989] WAR 305 Borebor v Keane [2013] VSC 35 Bosch v Perpetual Trustee Co Ltd [1938] AC 463 Bowyer v Wood [2007] SASC 327; (2007) 99 SASR 190 Buckland Deceased, Re [1966] VR 404 Butcher v Craig [2009] WASC 164 Christie v Manera [2006] WASC 287 Collins v McGain [2003] NSWCA 190 Cooper v Dungan (1976) 50 ALJR 539 Crossman v Riedel [2004] ACTSC 127 Devereaux-Warnes v Hall [No 3] [2007] WASCA 235; (2007) 35 WAR 127 Diver v Neal [2009] NSWCA 54 Flathaug v Weaver [2003] NZFLR 730 Gardiner v Gardiner (NSWSC, 28 May 1998, unreported) Goodman v Windeyer (1980) 144 CLR 490 Gorton v Parks (1989) 17 NSWLR 1 Harris, In Re (1936) 5 SASR 497 Hawkins v Prestage (1989) 1 WAR 37 Hughes v National Trustees Executors and Agency Co. of Australasia Ltd [1979] HCA 2; (1979) 143 CLR 134 Hyland v Burbidge [2000] NSWSC 12 Kay v Archbold [2008] NSWSC 254 Keep v Bourke [2012] NSWCA 64 Kembrey v Cuskelly [2008] NSWSC 262 Kleinig v Neal (No. 2) [1981] 2 NSWLR 532 McCosker v McCosker (1957) 97 CLR 566 McGrath v Eves [2005] NSWSC 1006 MacGregor v MacGregor [2003] WASC 169 Marks v Marks [2003] WASCA 297 Mayfield v Lloyd-Williams [2004] NSWSC 419 Pontifical Society for the Propagation of the Faith v Scales [1962] HCA 19; (1962) 107 CLR 9 Puckridge, Deceased, In the Estate of (1978) 20 SASR 72 Singer v Berghouse [1994] HCA 40; (1994) 181 CLR 201 Stern v Sekers; Sekers v Sekers [2010] NSWSC 59 Stiles v Joseph (NSWSC, 16 December 1996, unreported) Stott v Cook (1960) 33 ALJR 447 Taylor v Farrugia [2009] NSWSC 801 Verzar v Verzar [2012] NSWSC 1380 Vigolo v Bostin [2005] HCA 11; (2005) 221 CLR 191 Walker v Walker (NSWSC, 17 May 1996, unreported) Worladge v Doddridge (1957) 97 CLR 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Hazel Penberthy (Plaintiff) Harold Manasseh (Defendant) Representation: Counsel:Mr S Chapple (Plaintiff) Mr R Wilson (Defendant) Solicitors: Butlers Wills Dispute Lawyers (Plaintiff) Anthony N Walker (Defendant) File Number(s): 2011/328426
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate